Another Fedora gripe ...

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:37:20AM -0400, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> IIRC, this seriously breaks LSB specs, which say that /etc is to be 
> reserved for system wide configuration info. Putting OOo in /etc may 
> break (or severely impact) a number of otherwise-sensible backup and 
> partitioning strategies that rely on LSB conventions.

It breaks multiple specs (some of which I believe redhat claims to
follow and even helped create), and violates historical unix usage.

> The usual (and I believe LSB-mandated) practise for applications is to 
> use /usr/bin and /usr/lib for applications considered to be "part of the 
> system", and in either /usr/local or /opt if not. While one may debate 
> whether an office suite is "part of the system", neither of these 
> choices call for binaries to go in /etc.

Absolutely.

> If something like testtool can't find OOo in /opt or /usr/local (or even 
> /usr/lib and /usr/bin), I wouldn't consider it a very valuable tool. 
> That's no excuse at all for putting all of OOo in /etc.

There is no excuse at all that would be valid for putting OOo in /etc.
Incompetence is not a valid excuse either.

Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml